About your Search

20130126
20130203
STATION
CSPAN 9
CNN 7
CNNW 7
CSPAN2 4
KQED (PBS) 4
FBC 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
MSNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
WETA 2
WJZ (CBS) 2
KPIX (CBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 56
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)
, and i think now it would make sense that we have sent troops to deploy nato patriot missiles to defend turkey against syria, they see that as something that goes against their fundamentalist ideological thinking, and as a result of that, the group has been called into action. unfortunately, as small as this group might be, one could anticipate future targets on u.s. interests in turkey should further nay to have or troop and hardware ce employments take place in theing months. -- in the coming months. jenna: what do you think is the correct united states response? >> well, first of all, we have to be very serious. this is an attack on a nato country inside a nato country. turkey's a great ally. they've been a member of nato since 1951, and this is a serious attack. this is the eighth attack on an embassy under hillary clinton alone. so we have to have a tough response. i think that it's also very interesting that these attacks are happening when the u.s. policy in the region is really withdrawn. we are not active in syria. we are doing just little, minor things around the edges, and ye
. the group is an anti-american and anti-nato group. you may recall that nato is in the process of c deploying sevel american made patriot missile batteries to combat potential threat from syria. it's fox's top story. jennifer griffin is live at the state department. all of this is falling on sct hillary clinton's last day. >> reporter: in fact, it was an extraordinary scene at the state department just moments ago as secretary of state hillary clinton made her way through the hallways and to the exit where hundreds of state department employees had packed to say goodbye, to hear her final farewell. they cheered. it was a very emotional farewell for the secretary of state. the 67th secretary of state who has now left the building, but as you mentioned, the exit was marred by this attack in turkey on the u.s. embassy earlier in the day. here's what secretary of state hillary clinton said as she left. >> of course, we live in very complex and even dangerous times as we saw again just today at our embassy in ankara where we were attacked and lost one of our foreign service nationals and others in
walls would hurt u.s. diplomacy. turkey is a nato country and it's one of america's most important allies in this region. for the u.s., that makes this attack all the more painful. even on allied territory, a diplomat cannot feel safe. james reynolds, bbc news. >> for more on today's attack, i spoke a brief time ago with a director of theture concern research program at the washington institute. turkish officials say this bombing was linked to left wing militants in turkey. why would they attack the u.s. embassy? >> left wing tradition in turkey, rooted in turkey's marxist movements in the 1970's, is famously anti-american and although since the 1907s a collapse of communism these radical movements have been smaller in size, they were once movements with tens of thousands of people. they're still anti-american and i think we've seen a deployment of nato patriot missiles in turkey to guard turkey against instability from syria, so this never lent but kind of -- veer lent but kind of marginalized trend has been mobilized with the presence of u.s. troops and with the arrival of americ
in the region, and i think whether you say some people say it's related to the group being anti-american, anti-nato, american forces in turkey to protect turkey with missile defenses, but that's back to syria again, protecting them from syria. the policy in syria, i think, is a failure, certainly failing, and i think it may be, in some way, related to that. melissa: begs to question what do we have to do differently in syria, then? >> should have thought about that a long time ago, and i and others said there's a lot to do other than putting boots on the ground going back two years now. the situation is getting worse and worse. the israelis were involved in something the other day. this situation is spilling over the borders. we could have, you know, early on, we could have backed some groups we thought we could support. that was critically important, and then possibly arm them if they are the sort of people we can support. unfortunately, we waited and waitedded, didn't have good intelligence what was going on in that, couldn't find who to back, and right now, there's very important country in a si
. turkey is a nato country and it's one of america's most important allies in this region. for the u.s., that makes this attack all the more painful. even on allied territory, a diplomat cannot feel safe. james reynolds, bbc news. >> for more on today's attack, i spoke a brief time ago with a director of theture concern research program at the washington institute. turkish officials say this bombing was linked to left wing militants in turkey. why would they attack the u.s. embassy? >> left wing tradition in turkey rooted in turkey's marxist movements in the 1970's, is famously anti-american and although since the 1907s a collapse of communism these radical movements have been smaller in size, they were once movements with tens of thousands of people. they're still anti-american and i think we've seen a deployment of nato patriot missiles in turkey to guard turkey against instability from syria, so this never lent but kind of -- veer lent but kind of marginalized trend has been mobilized with the presence of u.s. troops and with the arrival of
on this. trace, listen, a week ago nato reported that at least one of those missile systems was up and running. >> it is, on top of that shep, there are some 400 u.s. troops on the ground ready to man those missiles in case they are needed. not just to keep the war in syria from spilling into turkey. but also to pressure syrian president bashar assad from using chemical weapons. since the syrian civil war broke out, turkey and the u.s. have gotten closer. nothing new because the u.s. has provided turkey with some $15 billion in arms over the past 60 years. and the marxist groups in turkey, like the ones said to be responsible for today's bombing do not like that. listen. >> they probably have only a few hundred members but they are active and they are kind of triggered into action. it's almost as if they are sleepers. triggered into action whenever the united states sends troops and personnel over to these countries, such as turkey, then you see them come into action. >> he went on to say marxist groups in turkey are much smaller today than they were some 20 or 30 years ago. clearl
of being an american puppet of imperialism. the group hates u.s. influence and that turkey is part of nato, which recently deployed patriot missiles here. this was not al qaeda, but marxi marxist, the government says, who just last september bombed a police station in istanbul. no matter who was responsible, u.s. officials perhaps gun shy after benghazi were quick to call it terrorism. >> what was characterized as a terrorist attack. >> a suicide bombing on the perimeter of an embassy is by definition an act of terror. it is a terrorist attack. >> reporter: tonight, u.s. diplomats are cautioning americans to be vigilant in turkey, even though it has been considered one of the safest countries in the middle east. an embassy guard was killed, but the suicide bomber never managed to get beyond the outer checkpoint. of the embassy building itself wasn't breached, brian. >> richard engel on the job for us in turkey tonight. richard, thank you. >>> there was more violence in egypt today. this time outside the presidential palace there. a large protest directed at president mohamed morsi. some of
of the regime of syrian president assad and the timing couldn't be any worse because the first of six nato patriot missile batteries are operational on turkey's border with syria. the missiles, partly run by u.s. troops. could war in syria bring the u.s. and iran interest an all-out war? joining me a former state department senior adviser and principle at d.c. international advisory, great to see you, christian. thanks. we are not mincing words when we say iran has come out strongest yet, even saying to saying to t. people who want to help the thousands who were in camples, who were killed, who were injured and iran is saying, start up with syria -- even try to help -- and you are at war with us. what does that mean? know, iran love this is syrian regime. it's so important to iran because iran uses syria to control what it considers to be its near abroad, export terrorism, to strike against not just israel, but other western interests, including the u.s. and citizens in places like lebanon, to have its tentacles deep into gaza. it's important for iran. it's doubling down on that. also, you
admired in the senate. i worked with him closely when i was an ambassador to n.a.t.o. i found him to always be very fair and very thoughtful. we have a very tough challenge with iran. iran is resisting negotiations. they won't even agree to show up at the p-5 negotiations with the the other countries. if they don't show up with the negotiations it will be give for the obama administration to go not go down that use of force which no one wants to go down. it's important that we send a tough message to iran and that is that the use of force is on the table unless they negotiate fairly. i'm with the president of wanting to negotiate with diplomacy. we need an united team in washington, so i hope he's confirmed. i hope he's confirmed expeditiously in the senate. >> jennifer: we're all hoping that. we are hoping to send a strong message and a strong team to represent us across the world. we thank you for coming to the war room. former u.s. ambassador nicholas burns. coming up, congress gets to pick it's spots in dealing with gun violence. unfortunately, community leaders on the front l
to intervene. >> retired general wesley clark is the former nato commander, retired air force colonel cedric layton is a former intelligence of a certificate. general clark, let me start with you. barbara starr just reported the algerian government has not been continuing, the cia has tried to piece this together themselves. this makes it very complicated and much more difficult. but only now, more than a week later, the u.s. government is connecting the dots which at least from when we talked to omar on the day of the attack seemed to be perhaps visible very early on. what is causing the delay? >> i would suspect the algerian government's quite embarrassed by the poor results. they've been criticized roundly by other western countries for not running a very effective operation. had a lot of people killed in the operation. it's not the way it's done. they pushed it up, they accelerated it, they simply don't have the sophisticated special ops capabilities for hostage rescue capabilities that western countries have. but eventually, i'm convinced, they will share information. we're going to fin
organization. it embraces a marxist leninist ideology. it is anti-imperialist, anti-u.s. and anti-nato for that matter. it has attacked u.s. interests and facilities during and before and after the first gulf war. but they hadn't done anything for a long time. so today is the first after, you know, a long break that they had attacked. u.s. embassy here in ankara. >> to you do we know how clear the evidence is that points to them? and i ask this because i've seen some terrorism experts here in the u.s. questioning about whether the turkish government has rushed to judgement in pinpointing this group, particularly because there are any number of groups operating in turky, capable of such violence. >> true there are a number of terrorist organizations from, you know, extremist leftist to kurdish to islamist terrorist organizations operating in turkey. i wouldn't go into speculating further than what the turkish authorities have provided to the turkish media. and we're hoping that the coming days we are going to have more details as to why this happened and why, whoever targeted the u.s. e
-imperialist anti-u.s. and anti-nato for that matter. it has attacked u.s. interests and facilities during and before and after the first gulf war. but they hadn't done anything for a long time. so today is the first after you know a long break that they had attacked. u.s. embassy here in ankara. >> to you do we know how clear the evidence is that points to them? and i ask this because i've seen some terrorism experts here in the u.s. questioning about whether the turkish government has rushed to judgement in pinpointing this group particularly because there are any number of groups operating in turky capable of such violence. >> true there are a number of terrorist organizations from, you know extremist leftist to kurdish to islamist terrorist organizations operating in turkey. i wouldn't go into speculating further than what the turkish authorities have provided to the turkish media. and we're hoping that the coming days we are going to have more details as to why this happened and why whoever targeted the u.s. embassy today had done so we don't know really much detail tonight. >> tulin
of the nato intervention. as someone who's studied this region and i have to say i was reading your congressional testimony about north africa yesterday, it's incredibly prophetic, you've gone before congress many times, how much do you see the intervention in libya as a moment that pushed us toward these effects we're now seeing? >> i think it did push us entirely. the question for me was, was it intended, was it ignored? because i think where i differ with some people, we have to remember what happened before the intervention. we have to remember that they requested intervention. we have to remember that gadhafi was threatening to hand down all the people in the streets. we also have to remember that at that time the revolution had started in tunisia and it had jumped to egypt and so it seemed to me that if you have a choice between not allowing people to be mowed down in the streets, you do that. now the link i see with other places is once you intervene, probably the intervention is always easy, it is the aftermath. >> that's what we learned. >> and i think the question that i h
to the parliamentarians of nato. these parliamentarians were very supportive of american drone policy and many of the nato countries are developing their own programs. i asked in english baroness, what will she say when china or iran vaporizes someone on the london bridge because they believe they are a threat to their country? what would you possibly say to object when the argument for drones that we now have the authority to take out anyone or anything in other countries that threaten us? it is anathema under international law. after world war two, we developed an international law that developed stability where countries have to take steps before they go to war. they cannot act unilaterally. the obama and bush administrations have torn that structure down. what is left is the state of nature. the american government that played such a key role in developing this international law is returning the world to a state of nature where the strongest country does whatever it wants. you have to ask yourself -- what happens when we are no longer the strongest country? what happens when there is another country t
the world bank and nato that protected our interest and benefited people and nations around the world. yet it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions, setting norms and shaping international affairs. now two decades after the end of the cold war, we faced a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debates. we see more paths to power opening up as nations gain influence to the strength of their economies rather than their militaries are going political and technological changes are empowering nonstate actors, like active this, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time, we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that spill across borders and defy unilateral solutions. as president obama has said, the old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. so the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. so the question we ask ourselves every day is, w
chiefly the u.n., the imf the world bank and nato that protected our interests, defending universal values and benefited peoples and nations around the world. yet it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions combat setting norms and shaping international affairs. now two decades after the end of the cold war, we faced a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debate. we see more passed power opening up as nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their military and political and technological changes are empowering nonstate actors like activists, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that defy unilateral solutions. as president obama's said, the old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. said the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. so the question we as
including working at the n.s.c. on detail, at nato headquarters, brought at the middle east and the pentagon. he was advisor to four presidents, president obama asked him to lead his afghanistan-pakistan policy review in early 2009 and he did that for a couple of months before happily, for us, returning to brookings. bruce has written already two books in the time he's been here, actually a third is about to come out, i'll mention that in just a second, but the first two were about al qaeda and then about the u.s.-pakistan relationship "the deadly embrace." . his new book, coming out next month is "avoiding armageddon" and it's the story about the u.s.-india-pakistan relationship and crisis management over the last half century or so. general stan mcchrystal is a 1976 graduate of west point. spent 34 years in the u.s. army. retiring as a four-star general in the summer of 2010. he has been commander in afghanistan. he was the director of the joint staff. but perhaps in military circles, most of all, as i mentioned, this five-year period at joint special operations command makes him memorable
lended to this. she's been one of the driving forces behind nato's no-fly zone over libya in order to prevent qadhafi from massacring his own people. and through deft diplomacy, she has slowly opened burma to the outside world. she's encouraging them to free political prisoners, hold parliamentary elections and finally permit foreign investment. and it's happening before our eyes. and, of course, she has taken special interest in the poorest nation in the western hemisphe hemisphere, an island nation right off of the east coast of the united states, less than an hour and a half flight time from miami. that's the island of haiti. the island nation of haiti on what is an island that christopher columbus was expected to have been the island that he landed, hispaniola now encompassing haiti and the dominican republic. and she has made haiti one of the top foreign policy projects, helping the impoverished island build back better after the devastating earthquake that killed over a quarter million people. in no small measure has her husband -- president clinton -- been a part of that att
that it was going to participate in a nato exercise to essentially dismantle the gadhafi regime in libya, i knew even as that decision was going to be taken, that there would be consequences throughout the sahel. the reason being that gadhafi provided a regime of stability in the sahel that was provided by his provision of direct economic benefits to the region, not only in terms of investment, but also in terms of direct transfers of moneys to the region. he was predictable upon his demise, not only would economic benefits be removed, but toureg soldiers in his islamic region would no longer be on the payroll, and no longer being in the payroll, they would then have to return to the countries of origin, primarily northern niger because they were no longer emerging employed. in the context of the demise, two arms depots were made available in tripoli, and heavy armorments were lewded from those depots and fell into the hands of those who would subsequently constitute and move forward with some secular resistant fighters in the north. that was the first point. the second point that we need to exa
.s. troops and nato forces to afghanistan, but is perpetual war finally over? maybe. the president favors a smaller and leaner military, and one whose limited size could likely discourage international engagements and he seems eager to refocus the troops away from the battles in the mideast and towards the cooler and maybe even cold engagement of the global balance with asia, and it is not clear that the president can end a perpetual state of war, but now is a good time to ask what a more peaceful world would look like. at the table is retired colonel john jacob, and editor and writer katrina vanden houvel and cloeby angyal and also welcoming in our new panelist. >> there was supposed to be the peace dividend at the end of the cold war, but i have given up on thinking about the end of war. >> well, president obama would like to find a different engagement with the world, and that means nation building at home, but even while he spokes those glorious words, we are at perpetual war. the largest problem is that as you step back and ask why is global war the appropriate framework for combatti
, this time in turkey, a nato ally. we'll talk to a man that knows all about turkey, retired lieutenant ralph peters and why they targeted the embassy now. imagine being on a flight and pilot passing out in midair? this happened last night. terrifying ordeal just ahead. and president's pick getting harsh reviews for his performance at confirmation hearing. why was chuck hagel so unprepared? >> correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> my reference. >> are you going to answer the question. the question is, were you right or wrong? ♪ i don't wanna be right [ record scratch ] what?! it's not bad for you. it just tastes that way. [ female announcer ] honey nut cheerios cereal -- heart-healthy, whole grain oats. you can't go wrong loving it. >>. >> alisyn: we want to tell you new developments on the growing crisis with iran and nuclear program. rogue nation announcing plans to ramp up uranium enrichment facilities. they will install advanced centrifuges that could speed up the enrichment process. u.s. calling this, quote a provocative step and comes as the u.s. continues to try to convince iran to end
of six patriot missile defense batteries is now operating in southern turkey. nato says it underscores the alliance's willingness to help turkey to intercept any rockets fired from syria. iran yesterday warned that it would view any attack on syria as an attack on iran itself. long-time u.s. senator tom harkin, democrat of iowa, announced yesterday that he will not seek a sixth term. as for why hark insaid i just think it's time for me to step aside. remember when people used to mail letters? if you're among those engaging in that quaint custom, first class postage has gone up again. 46 cents now as of today. no wonder so many of us don't do that anymore. now to weather. the cold snap goes on and today as much as six inches of snow is expected in the upper midwest. things will warm up over the next couple of days, but it won't last long. the chill returns at the end of the week. next, the invasion of the super bugs. ♪ when a man loves a woman ♪ >> osgood: and later singer/songwriter michael mmmmmm. a choice of 6 skillet entrees, each with an appetizer and dessert? whoa! no wonder t
for the u.n., world bank, and nato that defended universal values and benefited peoples and nations around the world. a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions and shaping international affairs. two decades after the end of the cold war, we face a different war. more countries than ever have a voice in global debate. nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their militaries. nine state actors are empowered. we faced challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that spill across borders and the fight unilateral solutions. the old postwar architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. the geometry has become more distributed and defused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. the question we ask every day is what does this mean for america? how can we invents our interests and also appalled a just rule based international order, a system that does provide clearer rules of the road to fair labor standards. we have to be smart about how we use our powe
.n., the i.m.f., the world bank and nato, that benefited peoples and nation around the world but it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions, setting norms and shaping international affairs. now, two decades after the end of the cold war, we face a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debates. we see more paths to power opening up as nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their militaries and political and technological changes are empowering non-state actors like activists, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time, we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that's still across borders and defy unilateral solutions. has said, thebama old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats, so the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffuse as the challenges we face have become more complex and cross-cutting. so the question we ask ourselves every day is what does this
. >> reporter: a number of nato countries permit women in combat like canada, france, germany, and australia. the british do not. the secretary's action technically opens all jobs. but the services can still apply for specific exemptions. if women are not able to meet certain physical standards. >> the concern i get when i talk to soldiers is really about lowering standards, saying that we'd have people on our team that can't carry their share of the weight. >> reporter: in the military, they mean that literally. some soldiers are loaded down with armored plates, packs, boots, and equipment, and they're hauling around more than 100 pounds. tank loaders have to lift a 40 to 50-pound shell out of a confined space, spin it around, and push it into the breach. a senior defense official says that standard cannot be lowered. officials have identified specific physical requirements for each combat job. next they'll turn that information over to scientists who can build physical tests to measure if a man or woman is fit for the front lines. >> at recruiting stations, you can't say, here, lift a 54-p
the french from being able to come into a country. they need to be able to stop nato from coming into countries on the continent. europe would not allow other foreigners to do this in europe. why would the africans allow this? they should not allow foreigners who colonized the bus and insulate us in the past to do this. these are our enemies. what is the true motive of the french for coming into mali? it is certainly not because they care. they are former colonial masters, people that enslaved us. these are our enemies. what is the reason they have come? certainly not because they care. guest: i think we are in agreement that most people -- the u.s. administration, the state department has noted in a statement that general ham said earlier also, everybody would like this to be an african-led solution. it's the only way to go ahead. unfortunately, although many of the african countries talk a great deal about getting involved, with the exception of a few. niger, i mentioned earlier. morocco has been leading on this, raising awareness on this issue for some time. mali, a year-and-a
could say about him? the nato bombing killed ultimately, if you include all of the allied movement, over 30,000 people ended up dying. if you look at the fall of libya and what he did, some people have our dimension it has the best health-care system and africa and the best literacy. people throughout africa said they did support ghadafi and did not want to bomb. libya has accepted sharing resources with others, unlike other regions like nigeria. there were given shelter and food. he supported them as brothers when they came in. not only that, but before the u.s. had basically control over most of the communications systems and africa, he put up several billion dollars for satellite systems so that africans would not have to pay the rental fees. the africans paid much less for communications across the country. i think you're giving a very one-sided picture of it. can you tell us what you think he did that was good and any criticism of the u.s. bombing? guest: there are a couple of good things i can say. one was the promotion of women in this society. he was very pronounced about that. w
this rebalancing even as we continue to work closely, closely with our longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends of other regions of the world. at the same time, we will continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where were have clear national interests. rather, it's a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. and the asia-pacific is vital to america's interests. doing all of this, and much more, will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear, i share leon panetta's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. and as someone who has run businesses i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources in our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayer's dollar the right way. to maintenance the strongest military in the world and to working with congress to ensure the dep
. another thing to add, turkey is a nato ally of the u.s. and in the last morning the u.s. has dispatched hundreds of u.s. personnel, as well as patriot missiles near the border between turkey and syria to help protect turkey from aircraft, air strikes, missile strikes from syria. this gives you a little of the political background as rescue workers scramble in ankara in the wake of this deadly explosion near the u.s. embassy. john. >> and just this week so much going on in the region, going on in the world. the news of the israeli bomb strike in syria. news in the united states, hillary clinton's last day at the state department today. some significant events going on around the world. are these the types of things that authorities will be looking at to piece together if there was a motive behind whoever might be behind it? >> listen, no question that the tension in the region has been ratcheting up. not only because of the raging syrian civil war. with the u.s. backing the opposition and rebels, others like iran backing the syrian regime. under immense pressure and losing grund. but wit
to the placement of pay ttriot missiles. >> reporter: the turkish government asked nato to place the missiles along the border of syria to deter any threat of the ballistic attacks, but the turkish group opposed them to operate the patriots. friday's suicide bombing was not the first time that western diplomatic areas have been attacked in turkey. in 1993 al qaeda killed scores of people as well as the consko late. and in istanbul six people were killed there as people fought to protect the building. the security measures work. twice in six years attackers have failed to break into u.s. diplomatic missions in turkey, but that is due in large part to turkish guards who lost their lives as the first line of protection. wolf? >> ivan watson, thank you. let's get a closer look at the united states embassy right now, and cnn's tom foreman is joining us. tom, show us how the em embassy is laid out in ankara. >> well, ankara is the second largest city in turkey, and the capital, and if you take the largest metro area, it is home of the government, and the u.s. embassy in the middle of everything with the
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)